Recommended Posts

Does the conventional wisdom about what makes a good candidate for the general election hold? It seems like some people would break with that and want to go super far left because polarization means exciting the base could be more important than winning over undecideds, but I think that might be oversimplifying the lessons of 2016. Trump didn't excite the traditional Republican base, he excited part of it while bringing in others and ensuring that enough of the people who weren't exited about him chose not to defect. Of all the names I've heard so far, Amy Klobuchar strikes me as the most likely to have broad appeal.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Tom Hanks should run.
Everyone loves him, no one has a bad thing to say about him, and even if he doesn't even know what he's doing. All he has to do is use his acting skill and act like a good president and he'll do a great job.

Perhaps Samuel L Jackson?

I'd love to see Mike Rowe run. But I'd doubt he'd run Republican or Democrat... Plus he lacks the will to run. It's not something he would ever want to do. Which is precisely why he should get the vote.

I say, Vote for the guy that doesn't want power. Last time we did that.. Was George Washington.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Tom Hanks should run.
Everyone loves him, no one has a bad thing to say about him, and even if he doesn't even know what he's doing. All he has to do is use his acting skill and act like a good president and he'll do a great job.

Perhaps Samuel L Jackson?

Reveal hidden contents

I'd love to see Mike Rowe run. But I'd doubt he'd run Republican or Democrat... Plus he lacks the will to run. It's not something he would ever want to do. Which is precisely why he should get the vote.

I say, Vote for the guy that doesn't want power. Last time we did that.. Was George Washington.

Seriously, God save us from any more celebraties running. It's great (actually horrible), we've done it once, now can we return to serious politicians?

1 hour ago, Lenlo said:

From what I have seen? Some people want O'Rourke to run, since he managed to get Texas in contention, even if he lost.

#TeamBeto #Beto2020 #BetoFTW

2 hours ago, WWWwombat said:

Does the conventional wisdom about what makes a good candidate for the general election hold? It seems like some people would break with that and want to go super far left because polarization means exciting the base could be more important than winning over undecideds, but I think that might be oversimplifying the lessons of 2016. Trump didn't excite the traditional Republican base, he excited part of it while bringing in others and ensuring that enough of the people who weren't exited about him chose not to defect. Of all the names I've heard so far, Amy Klobuchar strikes me as the most likely to have broad appeal.

I'm expecting 10-15 serious candidates, though I can't name them all. The important thing is that there's no 2020 version of Bernie Bros turning from the democrats and casting "pox on both your houses" votes.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Seriously, God save us from any more celebraties running. It's great (actually horrible), we've done it once, now can we return to serious politicians?

Do you want Trump out?

Also: Why does being a celebrity, automatically disqualify you from public office? It has always been more of a popularity contest over candidates that actually having knowledge/experience about the office or the issues.

This is the exact line of logic conservatives use when telling celebrities/nfl players to sit down, and shut up and get back in their isle.

You want to beat Trump? Use someone popular.

Don't choose someone who's qualified but universally hated.

Quote

I'm expecting 10-15 serious candidates, though I can't name them all. The important thing is that there's no 2020 version of Bernie Bros turning from the democrats and casting "pox on both your houses" votes﻿.

I blame a lot of things for her losing the election. Pertinent to this discussion; lack of Democratic/progressive unity. The Republican primary was as contentious - if not more so - than the Democratic one, however, at the end of the day, Republicans/conservatives came home to roost in much larger numbers than Democrats/progressives did.

Link to post

Share on other sites

I was never inspired or convienced or encouraged, or whatever by HRCs run - from declaration to nomiation to campaign. I support her though, fully, because I'd rather have President with a (Democratic) after their name - whatever their flaws may be - over a President with a (Republican) following.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I blame a lot of things for her losing the election. Pertinent to this discussion; lack of Democratic/progressive unity. The Republican primary was as contentious - if not more so - than the Democratic one, however, at the end of the day, Republicans/conservatives came home to roost in much larger numbers than Democrats/progressives did.

Ill bring it up every time, if HRC didnt want to alienate an entire base, maybe she shouldnt have openly cheated and bought a nomination, when corruption is one of the biggest talking points against her.

Link to post

Share on other sites

Also: Why does being a celebrity, automatically disqualify you from public office? It has always been more of a popularity contest over candidates that actually having knowledge/experience about the office or the issues.

This is the exact line of logic conservatives use when telling celebrities/nfl players to sit down, and shut up and get back in their isle.

You want to beat Trump? Use someone popular.

Don't choose someone who's qualified but universally hated.

Would you rather have the Rock perform open heart surgery on you or a medical doctor?

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I was never inspired or convienced or encouraged, or whatever by HRCs run - from declaration to nomiation to campaign. I support her though, fully, because I'd rather have President with a (Democratic) after their name - whatever their flaws may be - over a President with a (Republican) following.

And theres your issue. Your a party-liner. You don't care about positions, or an individuals personal conduct or any of that. You only care about party line. Welcome to why our country is so polarized.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Ill bring it up every time, if HRC didnt want to alienate an entire base, maybe she shouldnt have openly cheated and bought a nomination, when corruption is one of the biggest talking points against her.

Honestly, I've been thinking about her timing in general. She had been promised - at some point - a chance to run, and the DNC seemed unable to move on from her - for reasons I don't understand, but probably have to do with fundraising - until she was given it.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

And theres your issue. Your a party-liner. You don't care about positions, or an individuals personal conduct or any of that. You only care about party line. Welcome to why our country is so polarized.

If Republicans were to turn secular I'd start voting for them at the federal level again. I like a lot of their policies - in theory - but feel as though they fail the compassion/what would i like if I were in need test.

Okay, A couple of people whose claim to fame is that they are black, one who claims she is American-Indian and a lot of others who are untried and hardly known nationally or who like Bloomberg have a lot of baggage (ex-republican, claim to fame is his ties to Wall Street, is anathema to anyone who owns a gun, comes off like the Jewish New Yorker he is among other draw backs).

Biden is likely too old and has been around half a century, but on the up side he could at least have a shot of winning back the white working class vote.

Of course, I think that HRC will actually run again with a lot less institutional support but will likely e able to raise a considerable war chest.

A word about the nationally unkowns like beto. Problem with such people is that they have never had to bare the scrutiny or intensity of a national campaign. A couple of election cycles ago people like Ryan, Perry among others and this last time Rubio were seen as likely and potentially winning candidates in the Republican side, they all floundered under the instense scrutiny of a national election campaign where the opposition will find every fault you ever had and invent some if they cannot find enough to kill you with.

The problem is that you have to have a rather thick skin or the character of a shark (like Trump) to stay on message and turn the attacks on those that came after you. That is a very tall order and it's not at all clear that any of the above named Democrats will have that ability.

"

No to Biden.

Too old.

Not charismatic.

Not part of a winning narative."

Likely too old, and not chararismatic but likeable and has a base with the white working class and has a good relationship with African Americans. As for a winning narrative, as Obama's VP he has that built in.

"

there's no 2020 version of Bernie Bros turning from the democrats and casting "pox on both your houses" votes."

That presupposes a lot. What happens if Benie or another "Democratic Socialist" runs, or the party leadership coalieces around a more conventional choice?

"The Republican primary was as contentious - if not more so - than the Democratic one, however, at the end of the day, Republicans/conservatives came home to roost in much larger numbers than Democrats/progressives did."

Actually that is quite debatable. if you look at the actual votes cast HRC actually did as well or better then any Democractic candidate could have whose name was not Obama. That black vote was marginally down and so were the votes of some other modern mainstays of the Democratic Party had to be expected since whoever ran would not have had the minority appeal as Obama. Ands to expect that any Democratic candidate would have gotten the turn out among blacks and other minorites as Obama is simply political naitivity. The fact is it's not that the groups that make up the modern democratic coaltion did not turn out for HRC or that Trump was able to turn out a larger portion of the Republican vote. If you look at the actual numbers Trump likely lost as many "no Trumpers" as HRC lost blacks and other subgroups. The deciding votes especially in the swing states were the older white working class voters that had either voted Democratic (in some states in the upper middle west, likely upwards of 30% of the white working class voted for both Obama in 2008-2012 and Trump in 2016) ot not voted at all in recent elections.

Thus, while many bad things can be said about Trump especially his electorial strategy one of them is not that he simply attempted to maximize the traditional republican core vote, which is in reverse what many of the people suggested as Democractic candidates in 2020 would likely do.

"Honestly, I've been thinking about her timing in general. She had been promised - at some point - a chance to run, and the DNC seemed unable to move on from her - for reasons I don't understand, but probably have to do with fundraising - until she was given it. "

She was given her chance in 2008 and was defeated by Obama who seemed a more genuine choice to embody the modern Democratic Party. As to why the DNC was unabvle to move from her, it has to do not so much with fundraising but the fact that almost the entirety of the Democractic Party Leadership outside of the Obamas was made up of the Clinton Mafia (that is people who owed their very existance as party stalwarts to their alligence to the Clinton political machine that essentially has ruled the upper echelons of the party since 1992).

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Also, I love Elizabeth Warren, but I don't see her as a good national candidate being a super-liberal from MA. I also really dig having her represent me in the Senate. It would be fun to see all the Persist posters though. Seth Moulton's been getting some buzz. He's got a great resume and he could be a great candidate some day, but I don't think he has the political chops yet (as evidenced by his involvement in the attempt to take down Pelosi without actually offering a viable alternative).

I don't think this guy knows what he's talking about. Amazon is in the digital delivery service market. They may have started out selling books, but it didn't take long for them to broaden online ordering of books into online ordering of just about everything else, including movies and tv shows. Obviously consumers want this, otherwise Amazon wouldn't be doing $10 billion plus a year in net income and revenue of almost a quarter trillion dollars a year.
He also clearly has a bone in his craw over Sanderson finishing the series, and over Mr. Rigney's own Southern American heritage, and he either doesn't like the series, or doesn't like the series being made into a TV show, or both.

About Dragonmount

Dragonmount.com is a fan-maintained website dedicated to Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time fantasy series. It is an online community of people from all over the world who have come here to experience the series to the fullest.